Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2009 > June > 02 > Entry
The ‘Princess and the Frog’ flap continues …
A few weeks ago on this blog, I wrote about the “controversy” swirling around The Princess and the Frog, the new hand-drawn animated film from Disney coming in December. A number of you commented back “This is supposed to be offensive? How?”
Well, this is how it’s supposed to be offensive, according to The New York Times.
Having read the story, I still think the complaints are completely bogus. And I also quite agree with David Poland of Movie City News when he took the Times to task for running the story at all. Poland wrote: “On top of being late to the issue and manipulative in offering a news angle, the story is just not very good. (Reporter) Brooks opines, ‘The company wants to vanquish once and for all the whispers of racism that linger from stumbles in the past.’ I say ‘opines,’ because there is no quote connected in any way to Disney, even on background, to suggest that this is the case. Obviously, no one and no company want to have racism attached to their hip. But the inference is, throughout the piece, that this film itself is a reaction to Disney’s interest in how it is perceived. Please tell this to (directors) Musker, Clements, and (animation chief John) Lasseter, because I don’t believe it at all.”
Me neither folks. Disney has to know what lies ahead here. They’ve been going through these accusations for years, from The Song of the South to Aladdin, when Arabs griped about the lyric “Where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face.” Call me a Pollyanna, but I find it very hard to believe Disney would willingly walk into that minefield again. In fact, if I were Disney I would use the occasion to release Song of the South on DVD, put it in its proper perspective and get that albatross off the company’s neck once and for all.
I’m disappointed in the Times for giving that much credence to these complainers. From where I sit, most if not all of these naysayers are only out to draw attention to themselves. And, I find such self-righteousness at least as offensive as the prejudice it supposedly decries.
Here’s a quaint notion: How about seeing the finished product before we complain? Oh, wait, that would be intelligent and fair. Never mind.
Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment | Categories: Coming Attractions, Sir Critic muses
Comments
By SRCputt
June 3, 2009 6:58 PM | Link to this
Disney needs to release Song of the South by doing it correctly. The second disc should be discussions between the defenders and detractors, and there should be multple commentaries: one by detractors, one by defenders, and one to discuss the animation.By SRCputt
June 3, 2009 6:56 PM | Link to this
Remember how Lion King was supposedly racist? Because two of the hyenas were voiced by Cheech Marin and Whoopi Goldberg, so it had to be offensive. Because apparently no minorities can be bad people. Even dumber was that the film was homophobic because of the portrayal of Scar. Never mind that Scar wasn’t gay: he was upper class who couldn’t be bothered to get his hands dirty. The portrayal was based on Jeremy Irons’ Oscar winning performance as Claus Von Bulow. Of course the critics were demonstrating their own bias by assuming Scar had to be gay because he wasn’t as physically strong as his brother.By SRCputt
June 3, 2009 6:48 PM | Link to this
The dumbest complaint in the article is that it is set in New Orleans, because that supposedly insulting because of the tragedy that happened there. Someone should remind that idiot that the culture of the New Orleans is one of the most unique in the world, and it should be celebrated.By thoth
June 3, 2009 11:55 AM | Link to this
If you can’t find controversy to report, you manufacture it apparently.By JT
June 3, 2009 11:19 AM | Link to this
The New York Times is a dinosaur that is slowly smoking itself to death. In order to make itself relevant again, it must manufacture controversey where there is none. Disney is a savvy company that bends over backward to be PC (ever watch Disney Channel?) It’s almost as if the NYT is jealous of the success of Disney and feels the need to take it down a few rungs to their level. The NYT is dead, dying, kaput.